FreiCoin (FRC) discussion (was FreiCoin (FRC) for TRC, PPC, LTC or BTC) - page 7.

ElectricMucus

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1057

Marketing manager - GO MP

Quote from: galambo on January 07, 2013, 08:08:06 PM

Quote from: scrybe on January 07, 2013, 11:51:41 AM

FYI, that also looks like one of 3 sticks needed for a fasces (add 1 straight, 1 curved the other way, and a horizontal line or two for the rope and you have a fascism symbol), which might not be the best link.

This is the traditional fasces. I don't see how it resembles it?

Anyways, the fasces isn't evil. It's a roman symbol to represent "strength through unity." Its a heraldic charge used by many small towns in Europe.

You probably already know this, but there are two fasces prominently flanking the rostrum of the United States House of Representatives, where the Speaker of the House sits.

Go ahead, make it official.

BTW: Swastikas aren't evil either.

scrybe

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

Quote from: galambo on January 07, 2013, 08:08:06 PM

Quote from: scrybe on January 07, 2013, 11:51:41 AM

FYI, that also looks like one of 3 sticks needed for a fasces (add 1 straight, 1 curved the other way, and a horizontal line or two for the rope and you have a fascism symbol), which might not be the best link.

This is the traditional fasces. I don't see how it resembles it?

Anyways, the fasces isn't evil. It's a roman symbol to represent "strength through unity." Its a heraldic charge used by many small towns in Europe.

You probably already know this, but there are two fasces prominently flanking the rostrum of the United States House of Representatives, where the Speaker of the House sits.

Hmm, I must have an odd one in my head, or maybe I'm confusing it with some art-deco wheat I saw or something.

I think part of the point remains though, how does a peer to peer distributed currency that does not promote or require unity in any real way get to "Strength in Unity?

Quote from: galambo on January 07, 2013, 08:14:40 PM

I also like the ⌠ for historical/symbolic reasons. Maybe if you knew the reason you would understand more of what I am thinking here.

Quote

The ∫ symbol is used to denote the integral in mathematics. The notation was introduced by the German mathematician Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz towards the end of the 17th century. The symbol was based on the ſ (long s) character, and was chosen because Leibniz thought of the integral as an infinite sum of infinitesimal summands. See long s for more details on the history of ſ.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integral_symbol

This reasoning I like, but it's pretty geeky Wink

galambo

sr. member

Activity: 966

Merit: 311

I also like the ⌠ for historical/symbolic reasons. Maybe if you knew the reason you would understand more of what I am thinking here.

Quote

The ∫ symbol is used to denote the integral in mathematics. The notation was introduced by the German mathematician Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz towards the end of the 17th century. The symbol was based on the ſ (long s) character, and was chosen because Leibniz thought of the integral as an infinite sum of infinitesimal summands. See long s for more details on the history of ſ.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integral_symbol

galambo

sr. member

Activity: 966

Merit: 311

Quote from: scrybe on January 07, 2013, 11:51:41 AM

FYI, that also looks like one of 3 sticks needed for a fasces (add 1 straight, 1 curved the other way, and a horizontal line or two for the rope and you have a fascism symbol), which might not be the best link.

This is the traditional fasces. I don't see how it resembles it?

Anyways, the fasces isn't evil. It's a roman symbol to represent "strength through unity." Its a heraldic charge used by many small towns in Europe.

You probably already know this, but there are two fasces prominently flanking the rostrum of the United States House of Representatives, where the Speaker of the House sits.

galambo

sr. member

Activity: 966

Merit: 311

Nobody likes my idea to have a scientific notation built into the way we write the coin? Cry

I thought it was a great idea. Especially for talking about microeconomics (big numbers) and for microtransactions (small numbers)

Quote from: scrybe on January 07, 2013, 11:51:41 AM

If Europe is using the Euro now, can we contemplate stealing the "Fr" notation?

Quote from: Bicknellski on January 07, 2013, 09:54:09 AM

How about 24.9356╒ ╛

or 24.9356╒

Maybe we can use the symbol for a dutch guilder? 5ƒ = five freicoin

I like the ⌠ because its simpler.

galambo

sr. member

Activity: 966

Merit: 311

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on January 07, 2013, 07:30:28 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Why is maximum difficulty multiplier limited to 4? Huh

Bitcoin does the same thing it is a safety mechanism to prevent for a griefing attack.

It's not about greifing. Its a consequence of control theory. The gain of the controller must be limited or the system may overshoot or become instable.

jjiimm_64

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 1000

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on January 07, 2013, 07:24:20 PM

Well no initial difficulty didn't need to be set at 1. Given that per processor hashrate has grown by a factor of 500x since Bitcoin was launched (unoptimized non-OpenCL CPU code vs highly optimized OpenCL GPU miners) it is kinda insane one would choose to launch with a difficulty of 1.

Of course a difficulty of 1 means that rather than the first 8,000 blocks taking 3 months like Bitcoin it took less than 48 hours and those who participated in those early 48 hours when almost nobody knew the coin existed were able to mine at 30x faster than the targeted rate and those who mined in the first 4 hours mined at over 70x the targeted rate.

this!

Why the hell does a diff start at 1? when most miners have 1000 times the hashrate anyone had when bitcoin launched.

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: ?? on ??

Why is maximum difficulty multiplier limited to 4? Huh

Bitcoin does the same thing it is a safety mechanism to prevent for a griefing attack. It is much less likely now but imagine back when CPU mining was common. A massive botnet or supercomputer could mine a difficulty interval so fast it would cause the difficulty to shoot up 100x. Then they could simply stop and Bitcoin would die a death of starvation with the average block time being 16 hours and the time till next difficulty reset something like 4 years.

HOWEVER. Satoshi did some benchmarking and chose a starting difficulty that would require roughly a dozen computers. Bitcoin was less popular than that and as a result difficult remained 1 for months before it gained critical mass to move difficulty up. FRC either through ignorance or malice chose to keep a difficulty of 1 despite the average node now being able to mine 500x faster. It would have been like Satoshi picking a difficulty of 0.002 and as a result mining 20% of the coins himself in the first week.

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: galambo on January 07, 2013, 06:04:40 PM

Quote from: powersync on January 07, 2013, 05:59:36 PM

How is it difficult to understand on the second day 8000 blocks were mined. Are you saying it took longer? I'd like to see that data. I'm purely going off the charts provided here, which maybe wrong. Is there a way to view when blocks where made on freicoin? I'd like to see when block 1 and 8000 were made. Then its easy math.

PS

It took about 2 days for 8000 blocks, but thats just how the difficulty adjustment in Bitcoin is designed. We would have gotten to 8000 even faster if the network had more hashing power, believe it or not.

Well no initial difficulty didn't need to be set at 1. Given that per processor hashrate has grown by a factor of 500x since Bitcoin was launched (unoptimized non-OpenCL CPU code vs highly optimized OpenCL GPU miners) it is kinda insane one would choose to launch with a difficulty of 1.

Of course a difficulty of 1 means that rather than the first 8,000 blocks taking 3 months like Bitcoin it took less than 48 hours and those who participated in those early 48 hours when almost nobody knew the coin existed were able to mine at 30x faster than the targeted rate and those who mined in the first 4 hours mined at over 70x the targeted rate.

scrybe

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

Quote from: powersync on January 07, 2013, 06:41:18 PM

I will change that to "all miners".....But all miners at block 2000 made up a hash rate under 1000 Mh/s. Looks like one person to me.

Also we got to block 8000 in 1 day 20 hrs and 59mins. I was close at 2 days. So the fact still remains that over 50% of all the freicoins found were found in under 2 days. How is that not a premine? Why start the difficulty at 1 if it wasn't.

PS

It is a 100M coin limit with FRC, not 21M. They have only produced a bit over 10% so far.

It's not a premine because it was announced in advance when the genesis block would be released. Premining refers to the practice of mining a number of coins before the general public, not at the same time.

I just pointed out I was participating with 30Mh/s, look at the P2Pool payout address lists and you can get some idea for the first couple of days since the p2pool was one of the first things started. http://www.cryptocoinexplorer.com:4750/block/000000001c76a14764609061c1a9610932b39587fdaea43e51c5ce99c2de26f8 has multiple miners for sure, and I've not looked for anything earlier than that.

powersync

member

Activity: 77

Merit: 10

Quote from: scrybe on January 07, 2013, 06:29:10 PM

Quote from: jjiimm_64 on January 07, 2013, 06:20:07 PM

ok ok STOP. I dont want to think about how many frc i could have had if I had been following the release!

But you DO!

That way you know to be ready for the next launch Wink

I'm just lucky that ~~moron~~ "differently-abled thinker" I was debating on resurrecting destroyed bitcoins was pointed at FRC as an example of what he wanted to do. (it didn't help him)

Quote from: powersync on January 07, 2013, 06:26:46 PM

HOLY CRAP 2000 blocks in the first 4 hours 21 mins.

On an average from block 1 to 2000 someone was making 1915 coins/min. And that is after the 80% taken out.

PS

Change that from "someone" to "all miners" unless you have traced it back to a single address. You would need to determine the number of miners to get the average.

I will change that to "all miners".....But all miners at block 2000 made up a hash rate under 1000 Mh/s. Looks like one person to me.

Also we got to block 8000 in 1 day 20 hrs and 59mins. I was close at 2 days. So the fact still remains that over 50% of all the freicoins found were found in under 2 days. How is that not a premine? Why start the difficulty at 1 if it wasn't.

PS

scrybe

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

Quote from: jjiimm_64 on January 07, 2013, 06:20:07 PM

ok ok STOP. I dont want to think about how many frc i could have had if I had been following the release!

But you DO!

That way you know to be ready for the next launch Wink

I'm just lucky that ~~moron~~ "differently-abled thinker" I was debating on resurrecting destroyed bitcoins was pointed at FRC as an example of what he wanted to do. (it didn't help him)

I didn't realize the import of the launch though and waited 8 hours to start mining (block 6961), now THERE is a regret.

Quote from: powersync on January 07, 2013, 06:26:46 PM

HOLY CRAP 2000 blocks in the first 4 hours 21 mins.

On an average from block 1 to 2000 someone was making 1915 coins/min. And that is after the 80% taken out.

PS

Change that from "someone" to "all miners" unless you have traced it back to a single address. You would need to determine the number of miners to get the average.

powersync

member

Activity: 77

Merit: 10

HOLY CRAP 2000 blocks in the first 4 hours 21 mins.

On an average from block 1 to 2000 someone was making 1915 coins/min. And that is after the 80% taken out.

PS

jjiimm_64

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 1000

ok ok STOP. I dont want to think about how many frc i could have had if I had been following the release!

scrybe

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

Quote from: powersync on January 07, 2013, 06:05:36 PM

Quote from: Jorgeminator on January 07, 2013, 06:02:21 PM

Quote from: powersync on January 07, 2013, 05:50:03 PM

Take a look at the 2 charts above. One is time vs hashs and the other is block vs hashs. On each of the charts look where 10 g/hash lands. Its on day 2 and block 8000. Someone did 8000 blocks in the first 2 days.

PS

For the first 6048 blocks the difficulty was at most 16. Even with only my 5870 doing 375MH/s and 5.2 shares per minute on average, I would have found a block every third minute on average. I don't see the problem here? In the beginning the difficulty adjustment just can't keep up with the rise in hashing power, so if there was sufficient hashing power you could theoretically find those 8k blocks in less than an hour.

at 16 with 375 mh/s that is a block every 3mins

PS

Yep, and they were clipping by every 15-30 seconds at a few points.

Here is a more specific version of the link I gave earlier: http://www.cryptocoinexplorer.com:4750/chain/Freicoin?hi=19&count=20

PS, it is perfectly valid for a block to appear to have a time before it's parent, the order of the blocks is what matters, the apparent UTC time on the client behind the mining does not. Look at blocks 6032 to 6047 for example.

Jorgeminator

member

Activity: 91

Merit: 10

Quote from: powersync on January 07, 2013, 06:05:36 PM

at 16 with 375 mh/s that is a block every 3mins

PS

And that's exactly what I was trying to say, sorry for being fuzzy.

powersync

member

Activity: 77

Merit: 10

Quote from: Jorgeminator on January 07, 2013, 06:02:21 PM

Quote from: powersync on January 07, 2013, 05:50:03 PM

Take a look at the 2 charts above. One is time vs hashs and the other is block vs hashs. On each of the charts look where 10 g/hash lands. Its on day 2 and block 8000. Someone did 8000 blocks in the first 2 days.

PS

For the first 6048 blocks the difficulty was at most 16. Even with only my 5870 doing 375MH/s and 5.2 shares per minute on average, I would have found a block every third minute on average. I don't see the problem here? In the beginning the difficulty adjustment just can't keep up with the rise in hashing power, so if there was sufficient hashing power you could theoretically find those 8k blocks in less than an hour.

at 16 with 375 mh/s that is a block every 3mins

PS

galambo

sr. member

Activity: 966

Merit: 311

Quote from: powersync on January 07, 2013, 05:59:36 PM

How is it difficult to understand on the second day 8000 blocks were mined. Are you saying it took longer? I'd like to see that data. I'm purely going off the charts provided here, which maybe wrong. Is there a way to view when blocks where made on freicoin? I'd like to see when block 1 and 8000 were made. Then its easy math.

PS

It took about 2 days for 8000 blocks, but thats just how the difficulty adjustment in Bitcoin is designed. We would have gotten to 8000 even faster if the network had more hashing power, believe it or not.

Jorgeminator

member

Activity: 91

Merit: 10

Quote from: powersync on January 07, 2013, 05:50:03 PM

Take a look at the 2 charts above. One is time vs hashs and the other is block vs hashs. On each of the charts look where 10 g/hash lands. Its on day 2 and block 8000. Someone did 8000 blocks in the first 2 days.

PS

For the first 6048 blocks the difficulty was at most 16. Even with only my 5870 doing 375MH/s and 5.2 shares per minute on average, I would have found a block every third minute on average. I don't see the problem here? In the beginning the difficulty adjustment just can't keep up with the rise in hashing power, so if there was sufficient hashing power you could theoretically find those 8k blocks in less than an hour.

scrybe

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

Quote from: jjiimm_64 on January 07, 2013, 05:55:01 PM

and just think, with your 500Mh you could have had mucho blocks during those first 2 days... NO PREMINE

500? I had a great time with a 4750. 30Mh/s baby!

Topic: FreiCoin (FRC) discussion (was FreiCoin (FRC) for TRC, PPC, LTC or BTC) - page 7. (Read 42644 times)